ABSTRACT
Deep Brain Stimulation can improve tremor, bradykinesia, rigidity, and axial symptoms in patients with Parkinson's disease. Potentially, improving each symptom may require stimulation of different white matter tracts. Here, we study a large cohort of patients (N = 237 from five centers) to identify tracts associated with improvements in each of the four symptom domains. Tremor improvements were associated with stimulation of tracts connected to primary motor cortex and cerebellum. In contrast, axial symptoms are associated with stimulation of tracts connected to the supplementary motor cortex and brainstem. Bradykinesia and rigidity improvements are associated with the stimulation of tracts connected to the supplementary motor and premotor cortices, respectively. We introduce an algorithm that uses these symptom-response tracts to suggest optimal stimulation parameters for DBS based on individual patient's symptom profiles. Application of the algorithm illustrates that our symptom-tract library may bear potential in personalizing stimulation treatment based on the symptoms that are most burdensome in an individual patient.
Subject(s)
Deep Brain Stimulation , Motor Cortex , Parkinson Disease , Tremor , Humans , Deep Brain Stimulation/methods , Parkinson Disease/therapy , Parkinson Disease/physiopathology , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Aged , Tremor/therapy , Tremor/physiopathology , Motor Cortex/physiopathology , Algorithms , Hypokinesia/therapy , Hypokinesia/physiopathology , White Matter/pathology , White Matter/physiopathology , Muscle Rigidity/therapy , Cerebellum/physiopathology , Cohort Studies , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Patients with Parkinson's Disease (PD) who receive either asleep image-guided subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation (DBS) or the traditional awake technique have comparable motor outcomes. However, there are fewer studies regarding which technique should be chosen for globus pallidus internus (GPi) DBS. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare the accuracy of lead placement and motor outcomes of asleep versus awake GPi DBS PD population. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane for studies comparing asleep vs. awake GPi DBS lead placement in patients with PD. Outcomes were spatial accuracy of lead placement, measured by radial error between intended and actual location, motor improvement measured using (UPDRS III), and postoperative stimulation parameters. Statistical analysis was performed with Review Manager 5.1.7. and OpenMeta [Analyst]. RESULTS: Three studies met inclusion criteria with a total of 247 patients. Asleep DBS was used to treat 192 (77.7 %) patients. Follow-up ranged from 6 to 48 months. Radial error was not statistically different between groups (MD -0.49 mm; 95 % CI -1.0 to 0.02; I2 = 86 %; p = 0.06), with a tendency for higher target accuracy with the asleep technique. There was no significant difference between groups in change on motor function, as measured by UPDRS III, from pre- to postoperative (MD 8.30 %; 95 % CI -4.78 to 21.37; I2 = 67 %, p = 0.2). There was a significant difference in postoperative stimulation voltage, with the asleep group requiring less voltage than the awake group (MD -0.27 V; 95 % CI -0.46 to - 0.08; I2 = 0 %; p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis indicates that asleep image-guided GPi DBS presents a statistical tendency suggesting superior target accuracy when compared with the awake standard technique. Differences in change in motor function were not statistically significant between groups.
